Sunday, August 26, 2012

India
seems to have been gripped with a strange but unspoken competition going on
within its boundaries. States, cities, organizations, individuals, just about
everyone seems to be busy taking on everyone else in a battle of wits. The only
catch being, in this battle of wits, everyone appears unarmed !

Just a few weeks back, the management of the famous Mahalaxmi Temple
in Kolhapur(Maharashtra)
decided to impose a dress-code for the women devotees visiting the temple. But
before they could hog the media limelight, some alert ‘social activists’ from
the city of Ranchi
declared that females who preferred wearing jeans would be greeted with acid
attacks. Though these well-meaning ‘social activists’ didn’t confirm that the
acid would be that contained in their own skulls.

While just the other day, the professors of a college in Bareilly, denied entrance
to female students into the college campus. Why ? Obviously… the girls were
dressed in jeans and tops. (More here)

It appears to be a really sorry state for the Indian male.
With the females being the center of attraction of all and sundry (right from
Guwahati to Mangalore) the Indian male can just sulk in frustration. I mean, a
girl who is covered up from head to toe, revealing no more than 15% of her skin
gets more raised eyebrows than a poor guy standing topless on the road. Why ?
Just because the girl is attired in western clothes on Indian land. So unfair !

According to the management committee of the Mahalaxmi Temple, “it was observed that majority of women visited the temple in western
attire. It doesn't look decent and also distracts attention of male devotees.” (More
here)

And all this
while, I thought a temple was supposed to be for the worship of Gods and
Goddesses and They should have been the ones examining the devotees. Not the
members of some committee. And shouldn’t the male devotees be concentrating on
their devotion to the Gods instead of the girl standing besides them ? Ahhh…
but haven’t I always reveled in the bliss of my ignorance !

And strangely,
the Mahalaxmi Temple is dedicated to Goddess ‘Shakti’,
the goddess of power ! When asked if the temple committee plans similar rules
for male devotees, committee members said that there was "no need for
dress code for male devotees". Errrr… excuse me, but shouldn’t it be the
male devotees who should be properly dressed while visiting a Goddess ?

The professors of
the college in Bareilly
claimed that “wearing jeans spoils the college environment.” Of course,
the male students and the male professors (many of whom themselves were dressed
in jeans) would be expecting any and every girl dressed in jeans to break into
an ‘item song’ on the campus. Detrimental to the studies… I tell you !!!

Strangely, sometime back the professors of an ‘all-girls’
college in my own city were in the news as they banned jeans for its students.
And there weren’t even any male students or professors in that college !

And all this while, the ignorant me thought that the issue
was about the showing of skin. (exclusively related to females, obviously)

Though, of course, skin show is sacrilege. For a female,
that is. A man wearing an ill-fitting t-shirt and shorts is welcome to fold his
hands and pray in a temple (I’ve witnessed it many times myself), but not a
girl who forgets to cover up her head. I was a bit confused when I saw the male
priest of a famous temple performing the ‘aarti’ with just a ‘dhoti’ tied
around his waist. The ‘Tissot’ watch on his wrist was obviously ‘western’.
Though he didn’t have a baseball cap on his head. Or any other head-gear for
that matter. If the dress/decency aspect is to be considered, then how, he was
the most eligible person to be nearest to the Goddess was something my idle
brain couldn’t comprehend.

So, jeans, shorts or skirts are western. And thus, are
strictly forbidden. But why just for girls ? Ohh… boys don’t wear skirts. So,
jeans and shorts are fine for boys. But I wonder why don’t boys test the waters
by trying out skirts. Maybe that will be fine as well. But as long as one is a
good, cultured Indian girl, jeans, shorts and skirts are forbidden. No wonder
the young girls from the village ‘Asara’ collectively burnt a bonfire of jeans and
other western dresses in favor of a 'directive' dress code by their elders
recently. (More here)

When a Sunita Williams walks smartly dressed in a pair of
jeans, she is ‘Bharat Ki Beti’.

When a Saina Nehwal wins an Olympic Bronze wearing a short
skirt, she is ‘Bharat Ki Shaan’.

Ahhhhh….. where was I ???

Last week while blog-hopping, I stumbled on to a story of a
young American girl who has been going around topless in New York State since
1992 to raise
awareness that it's legal for a woman to be topless anywhere a guy
can be without a shirt. According to her, she was harassed by middle-aged men
while debating going topless with passersby (including one man who said topless
women are "going against God's law"). So you see, God’s laws are not
just a boon to India.
They are fortunately available all around the world. But it is in India,
that those ‘laws’ can be effectively put into practice (exclusively to
females).

August 26th is ‘International Go Topless Day’.
But our society believes in celebrating our ‘top-less-ness’ all the year round.
Our top floors are ever so empty !

Monday, August 20, 2012

The other night I was watching a debate on ‘Times Now’ about
an ex-minister who has been accused in the case of suicide by a young
air-hostess. Anyone with a bit of common sense, after watching the development
of the case can understand how a person with power, money and a criminal
record, has been making a mockery of the legal system of the country.

Yet, I was aghast to see a senior lawyer of the Supreme
Court (who has been selected by the accused politician to fight his case)
exclaiming his client to be absolutely innocent. According to him, the accused,
who had been declared absconding by the police, was merely exercising his legal
rights by evading questioning and seeking anticipatory bail.

Now, why would a person seek anticipatory bail and abscond
to evade the police if he is absolutely innocent ? It doesn’t really require
rocket-science to make out how innocent the man really is. But then why was
such an eminent and senior lawyer trying to defend a man who had so many
evidences against him ?

It could be because the lawyer was carrying out his
professional duty towards his client who had obviously paid him a huge amount
of fee. Not considering money to be the deciding factor, but should we really
imagine that the lawyer was bound to do so because of his duty towards his
profession ?

Hence, I wonder if professional duty is such a driving force
that makes a person forget about morality. Or is it just the other side of the
coin of a fair legal system to provide an equal opportunity of defense to an
accused ? Just like the appointment of a lawyer for defense for the terrorist
‘Kasab’ who was captured during the 26/11 attack ?

But does such a criminal even deserve a defense ? Someone
who is caught red-handed murdering so many innocent citizens ? Does such a
terrorist have human-rights for himself who didn’t blink an eye while
destroying hundreds of innocent lives ?

What should the lawyer have done who was appointed to defend
the terrorist ? Should he have accepted just because it was his professional
duty ? Or was his job more important to him ?

Being a doctor, I now shift the same question towards
doctors.

Suppose the accused politician I mentioned above is finally
proved guilty and sentenced to prison. Most probably (if not surely) he will
then complain of chest pain and will be shifted to a personal room in some
hospital. Should the doctor on duty be true towards his profession and treat
the criminal just as another patient ?

I wonder, if I was the doctor on duty in a government
hospital, and was asked to treat a criminal for an illness, who had raped and
murdered a little girl, would I rather think about the ‘Hippocratic oath’
(which asks me to treat any and every person who is in need of treatment) and
treat the criminal with care or would I think about losing my job if I refused.

Should a terrorist like ‘Kasab’ be entitled to the care from
a doctor for an illness just like any other normal patient ? Should the
‘Hippocratic oath’ decide the doctor’s actions ? Or should his conscience
decide it for him ?

Should a professional forget about his professional duties
while tackling a criminal case and let his conscience take the decision ?

OR…. is money and security of job the biggest factor for
one’s actions in today’s times ???

Saturday, August 4, 2012

It has not been surprising how over the past few days, every
news channel is going berserk with debates, discussions, news-specials and
breaking-news about the ‘India Against Corruption’ campaign which has been
going on for quite some time now. There have been views both for and against
the movement, some subdued, others harsh. But there are a few points which made
me ponder upon what exactly was and is happening.

Firstly, as I hear each social-activist, celebrity,
politician and even common people exclaim on the television how every Indian is
sick and tired of corruption in the country. I wonder if every Indian citizen
is against corruption, then who exactly are the corrupt people ? Are they some
individuals imported from places like North Korea,
Iraq or Kazakhstan ?

I know my question appears rather stupid, as ‘every Indian’
here means every citizen who is not corrupt. Then who exactly is corrupt ?

And then I come to realize that the common man or the ‘aam
aadmi’ of India
refers to the government officials, bureaucrats and politicians when he talks about corruption. So I ask, are
theses people then, some foreign nationals who have smuggled into India
for the purpose of looting its people ? Or is it the Chinese population who
voted for our parliamentarians ???

NO ! All the
corrupt people against whom all of India
is fighting are legal citizens of India as well. But are these
government-related individuals any different from the rest of the Indian
population ? (except the fact that they are corrupt)

NO ! They come
from the very society that makes up the rest of the population. Be it a peon, a
clerk, a bureaucrat, a politician or a minister. And it is certain that a
person’s economic class has nothing to do with him being corrupt or not. A
peon, if corrupt, will ask for a bribe, just as a minister will, to help a
business lobby.

And there’s a war
going on between the IAC movement and the government about passing a bill. The
IAC wants a ‘Jan Lokpal Bill’ while the government is adamant on its own
version of a ‘Lokpal Bill’. And it is almost an accepted perception that such a
bill will certainly curtail corruption and without which corruption cannot be
checked. As if such a Bill/law/anti-corruption body is the one and only way to
weed out corruption from the country.

So, in other
words, we are trying to emphasize that we, the corrupt people, will not change
unless and until there is a law which honestly and efficiently checks us if we
are corrupt and punishes us if we are guilty !

Isn’t it amazing
how we dance, sing, fly the tricolor and rejoice in anticipation of the passing
of such a ‘Bill’. Isn’t it like rejoicing about the realization of the extent
of corruption ?

Should we
actually be proud that our society has come to such a low that there is no hope
of us changing and we simply refuse to change unless we are checked and
punished ??? That we will stop being corrupt only when forced by the law…

It is said that
corruption is so rampant because the people in charge are not accountable. And
that the people at the helm are corrupt themselves so corruption is rooted deep
into the system. Doesn’t that mean that every subordinate will continue to be
corrupt till his superior is corrupt too ?

Are all
government officials honest people before they join their jobs ?

Do they become
corrupt only after they get into the government service ?

If they were
honest before, should they become corrupt just because they have a corrupt
superior who doesn’t check them ?

Each and every
government official and employee is from amongst us. They may be someone from
our family, friends, neighbors or relatives. Then how do they manage to become
corrupt ? Is a person corrupt without his family knowing about it ? But still,
we as a society let it happen just because it is someone close to us. And we
point fingers to those whom we are not related to.

Secondly, is
corruption only synonymous with the government ? Is every other individual in
any other field of work completely honest ?

What about the
doctor at a private hospital who refers his patients for useless investigations
just because he gets a part of the investigation charges too ? Is that not
corruption ? (Being from the medical field I have witnessed things which might
put even a government employee to shame)

What about the
employee of a Multi National company who prepares forged bills for
re-imbursement from his company ? Is he not corrupt ?

What about the
member of a NGO who bungles funded money instead of utilizing it for the
required purpose ? Is that not corruption ?

What about the
person who drives without a seat-belt/helmet or over-speeds and tries to bribe
the policeman instead of accepting a ticket ? Is he honest ?

A common-man who
is a honest citizen who is sick and tired of corruption, protests for an
anti-corruption bill without realizing :

How he turns his
head away when his neighbor is hacking the electricity line without using a
valid meter. Just because the neighbor looks after his house when he is away.

How he tries to
bribe a railway official to provide him a seat without having a valid ticket to
travel.

How he skips taking a valid bill while shopping, to evade
the service tax.

How he ignores the fact that his own colleagues are
indulging in corrupt practices while being in either the government or the
private sector.

How he writes an application for a false sickness-leave for
his school going relative just because he skipped school for no reason.
Probably training the kid who may one day himself go on to forge documents as
an official.

How he secretly conducts coaching classes even though it is
illegal for him to do so being a government salaried school/college teacher.

How he bungles up donations collected from the locality in
the name of organizing a religious function.

The above are just a few examples of the types of corruption
a common man takes active part in. And even if I haven't indulged in such acts, I am no less corrupt by being a mute spectator and letting others indulge in such acts just because they are close to me.

But somehow, we seem to be obsessed by linking the word
corruption to everything related to only government offices. We detest at
having to pay a bribe to a stranger in some office, but we are fine when our
own near and dear ones do the same.

I am all for any anti-corruption bill, even if it is
directed only to government related corruption and even if it curbs corruption
by 0.0001%. Anything positive, no matter how little should be appreciated.

But living in a false sense of euphoria that any rule or law
can eradicate corruption or even curb it to a great extent is dangerous.

Corruption is not some dust that can be wiped with the magic
broom of a Bill. It is also not any act. (bribe or otherwise) Corruption is a
part of one’s character. So, even if strict laws are made to check a corrupt
individual, he will always find ways to play by his character.

A rule or a law can be a symptomatic treatment. But just as
in medicine, any symptomatic treatment should be given to suppress the symptoms
while the root cause of the disease is being treated, just relying on a
symptomatic treatment for cure can be dangerous. So, prevention and awareness
of our society through those near to us is the only way to cure the menace of
corruption. And that’s not possible overnight.

As for the government, it can never change till people
continue to vote according to caste, religion and ideologies of political
parties.

So, while I’ll be all for any anti-corruption movement, I,
as a citizen, need to check my own indulgence in any sort of corruption and
also create awareness and prevent those near me to indulge in corruption. I
don’t need to sing, dance, clap or run around with a cap on my head and a tricolor
in my hand in anticipation of a magic cure in the form of a Bill. Even if that
forces me to be labeled as pro-corruption.